Action adventure genre in a renaissance, says Splinter Cell dev

Ubisoft Toronto game director claims players are "really hungry" for upcoming Blacklist game, which he says will offer "taut experience."

The action adventure genre is moving through a renaissance period, claims Splinter Cell: Blacklist game director Patrick Redding. In a video interview with GameReactor, the developer asserted that players are "really hungry" for its new game. The action adventure series is going through a revival period, says Redding.

“I think something that we’re seeing is there’s been a real renaissance in action-adventure," he said. "And I think that we’re able to take a lot of the unique features of the Splinter Cell world and really embrace that opportunity.”

Redding further elaborated on why he believes Splinter Cell: Blacklist offers what players are seeking from an action adventure game.

"Players would like to have this kind of taut experience in a realistically rendered world, with a really good storyline, and with a hero who is lethal and efficient, whose shoes they can step into," he said. "And I think we’ve got all three of those things.”

Splinter Cell: Blacklist was announced during Microsoft's 2012 Electronic Entertainment Expo media briefing earlier this month. It is the newest entry in the series and puts players back into the boots of franchise hero Sam Fisher, as he takes on a new global threat. The game is due out during spring 2013 for the PC, PlayStation 3, and Xbox 360 with Kinect support.

I agree having this new action-adventure game, but if you changed Sam's voice, then change the title, change the main character and remove anything related to Splinter Cell from the game. It would be awesome.

You know, I get that they wanted to use an existing IP to cash in on name recognition; but if you were going to do that, why not choose Bourne? I mean this gameplay style already fits that franchise and Bourne is even more recognizable than Splinter Cell to the audience they're trying to reach with this game. This game would have been amazing if they had just called it Bourne instead.

No this isn't what people who liked splinter cell want...just like the abomination conviction. After seeing the video for this game,im coming to terms with the fact that the splinter cell 'stealth' series is dead and they didn't just make a mistake or lose their way with conviction.

I think the game will be fun, but I'm tempted to NOT buy it... Is that what it will take to get them to stop butchering the SC series? It's becoming a CoD infuenced joke, along with Resident Evil. The game used to require using your brain instead of sprinting out and shooting everyone you see. Out of respect, at least change the name of the series. It's like Justin Bieber calling himself Eminem.

I enjoyed Conviction, but I'd prefer Splinter Cell go back to it's roots (Chaos Theory). I will most certainly not be buying this. I am sick of great games ruined because idiots can't handle the complexity. RIP Splinter Cell and Brothers in Arms

I agree with the developers about giving the player options as opposed to a more rigid approach, but they could do more to reward the player for making different choices. hear me out, even though I loved the old splinter cell games, i always craved for something a bit more raw -- my logic being that this guy was the ultimate agent; able to dispatch multiple foes with a single moment. I think they likened sam to a "panther" in Conviction. being quick and pretty and powerful about your take-down strategy felt awesome and suitable...I took great pride in playing conviction without firing weapons...or at least using the pistol as a last resort and feeling a bit guilty about it. sometimes i'd take it a step further and refuse to use gadgets. (if you thought the game was easy, then try it like that.) For me, and i do consider myself a stealth purist, enjoyment came from my ability to challenge myself. But the game itself did not give me feedback, which could have helped make me feel even more satisfied with my choices. I think that's what's missing, because otherwise the game can be as hard or as easy as you want it to be...just use your imagination. Hopefully they do that for this game so that more people can start appreciating the hardcore fun.

also, they could balance the one-on-one multiplayer mode. sonar made stalking your opponent feel stupid because we both could find each other in seconds. get rid of it entirely or make it so that agents can't see each other.

"Reniassance?" No way not when their last game was like 3-4 hours long with no multiplayer to speak of and little to do outside the campaign...even in the campaign left much to be desired in terms of content and gameplay. I loved the first 3 games but after CT I feel the series went down hill.

I can see why they want to support both game styles, but when every mistake can be fixed by running-and-gunning, your actions have less effect. Being good at a difficult stealth game feels rewarding; being good at an easy stealth game kinda makes me feel like an asshole. Spy vs. Mercs was a good decision though.

I love the SC series with 'Chaos theory' & 'Conviction' being the standouts, and am really looking forward to Blacklist, hopefully Ubi will restore the ability and requirement to hide/dispose of neutralised enemies, i loved the 'On the fly' change of pace that Conviction provided, and although Stealth was a key element it just missed the extra component required to make you think that little bit harder.

I played old, and I played new Splinter Cell games, and they are quite different, but I don't agree that Conviction was bad. If you look at it as some SC sequel, than you might get disappointed because it's nothing like old ones. But I like Conviction. I like the cover system, I like the ending, and I like the fact that I'm not waiting in shadows for an enemy to come by so I can kill him. I just go hunting. So if you look at it as one game, not a new SC, that is really fun, than you got you're self a good game. So I'm looking forward to Blacklist. It looks like it's gonna bring some dynamics to a Conviction concept. But, after all, this is just my humble opinion.

Agreed! And in most cases, the people generally complaining about the lack of stealth in 'Conviction' are most probably the ones that treat it as a 'Run-n-gun' with a fancy M & E dynamic. Regarding the Sonar, i absoloutely agree that especially in MP it totally defeats the whole object, this is the main reason i hardly play GR:Future Soldier online.

@AuronAXE Why does it matter? Splinter Cell evolved with gaming's player base. More people like running and gunning compared to stealth. It sucks i know but it's the truth. Also having Splinter Cell in the title is a huge selling point. Ubisoft is a company after all.

I agree, I really enjoyed Conviction and I have played past games in the series. However, I do feel that the game could have easily improved as well, and Blacklist does improve on Conviction's formula. I just hope that they keep some stealth in there too.

@thenephariouson i couldn't agree more, except to add that those players probably treat it as run and gun because the "fail mission" isn't being handed out so much. It was so frustrating to play online with a run'n'gunner. they ran through the entire level taking out dudes left and right with complete abandon. Effective? yes. but just aggravatingly without finesse. don't get me started on camping gun-toting agents in one-on-one...I developed some pretty dope relationships with some players based on the fact that we both wanted to feel like the quiet team of expert killer agents. and when we faced-off, we took great pleasure trying to outsmart each other. Like this one time, I asked a friend if he would mind not using the sonar at all and only use guns on the enemy AI. We ran around the map trying to find and kill each other, and it was great fun -- but the icing on the cake came when i baited him. It was the eschelon map and i killed some guards on the upper floor to get his attention. I saw him out of the corner of my screen hiding by the stairs. Note: my avatar had his back to him in-game, so i knew there was a good chance he didn't see me. So i fired randomly at some badguys and booked a retreat -- posting up in the nook next to the soda machine. Sure enough, round the corner he came. and I got a nice neck-break. now....THAT was DOPE. moreover, my opponent thought so too! i have other moments, but you get the picture. those transitions...the split-second planning and execution in all its set-up glory is only possible because of the options I had at my disposal. the way i see it: ubisoft just has a big balancing act on their hands.

@WildWarrior9371 No it did not "evolve". If anything it devolved in order to appeal to the dumbed down masses that were not interested with the first SC games to begin with. It is a well known fact that the noob friendly game loving casual gamer will always outnumber the hardcore skill based gamer the same reason Justin Bieber will always sell better than true musicians; more dumb people exist in this world than smart people. This can be proved by the amount of copies Call of Duty sells compared to other superior games.

@The-Neon-Seal@WildWarrior9371@AuronAXE I agree. But companies as a whole need to make a buck and if their are only a small amount of gamers who would avidly go and buy stealth games out of a mass audience that would buy a run and gun game which one is the most logical from a financial standpoint.